It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Strategic Command deletes and apologizes for gung-ho NYE tweet

page: 6
21
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
In my opinion on New Years eve it was in bad taste to post such a tweet.

I don't think they should have been made to remove the tweet (its my understanding that they weren't) although I personally agree with their own decision to remove the tweet because like I said I think its in bad taste at this time of the year. My personal interpretation of this tweet isn't so much a threat of dropping bombs but I still think its in poor taste and I can understand why some might view it as a indirect threat.

I also understand that STRATCOM might want to convey a message to the American people that they remain at a state of readiness at all times, even at new year, however I do think that there would be a better way of conveying that message.


I think you are missing the point. There are some things that are sacred. You can burn the American flag but it is considered really bad tasted to people who respect it. You can make threats about killing the people you are supposedly sworn to protect but it is really bad taste.

Whoever tweeted the joke should be discharged from the military. I don't think they take their job or career in the military seriously.



I agree they should lose their job for that one.
It shamefull


Unrealistic. Taking a professional out of their job for an offensive tweet is absurd. Taxpayers spent a lot of money to train this person and develop them up through to the job they're currently holding, on the way to bigger things. Even if I acknowledge this is a mistake, which I don't, if it is all they deserve is a reprimand. Stick to matters on which you're informed. If servicemembers lost their jobs over politically correct nonsense, we'd have no military.


The thing is stealth bomber pilots have never tweeted about dropping nukes to the world on new years day and it is unpresedented. No one with common sense would do something like that.

I wouldnt be surprised if the chain of command relieved him and any others involved of duty because its irresponsible and an international news story.

If you fly around with nukes you simply do not make such statements if you want to keep your job.
Other nuclear nations see that not as a joke but as a thret. It could actually start a nuclear war.
He/They overstepped and they know it.
Actions have consequences and its not a game.
So yeah he/they should be removed from duty.




posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
In my opinion on New Years eve it was in bad taste to post such a tweet.

I don't think they should have been made to remove the tweet (its my understanding that they weren't) although I personally agree with their own decision to remove the tweet because like I said I think its in bad taste at this time of the year. My personal interpretation of this tweet isn't so much a threat of dropping bombs but I still think its in poor taste and I can understand why some might view it as a indirect threat.

I also understand that STRATCOM might want to convey a message to the American people that they remain at a state of readiness at all times, even at new year, however I do think that there would be a better way of conveying that message.


I think you are missing the point. There are some things that are sacred. You can burn the American flag but it is considered really bad tasted to people who respect it. You can make threats about killing the people you are supposedly sworn to protect but it is really bad taste.

Whoever tweeted the joke should be discharged from the military. I don't think they take their job or career in the military seriously.



I agree they should lose their job for that one.
It shamefull


Unrealistic. Taking a professional out of their job for an offensive tweet is absurd. Taxpayers spent a lot of money to train this person and develop them up through to the job they're currently holding, on the way to bigger things. Even if I acknowledge this is a mistake, which I don't, if it is all they deserve is a reprimand. Stick to matters on which you're informed. If servicemembers lost their jobs over politically correct nonsense, we'd have no military.


The thing is stealth bomber pilots have never tweeted about dropping nukes to the world on new years day and it is unpresedented. No one with common sense would do something like that.



They didn't actually tweet about that. We can't discuss the topic if you don't even know what the tweet was about.


I wouldnt be surprised if the chain of command relieved him and any others involved of duty because its irresponsible and an international news story.


I would, because it would be irresponsible and stupid to remove someone from their job because of the uninformed opinions of people who are just looking for any excuse to be offended.


If you fly around with nukes you simply do not make such statements if you want to keep your job.
Other nuclear nations see that not as a joke but as a thret. It could actually start a nuclear war.


No they don't, and no it can't. You really have no grasp of strategic concepts if you believe this. Where exactly did you read that garbage? Was it in Huffington Post this morning?


He/They overstepped and they know it.
Actions have consequences and its not a game.
So yeah he/they should be removed from duty.


I explained why it was removed. It wasn't because "They overstepped and they know it" they're just caving to the PC police like so many do these days. No discipline is needed. They will all get a few hours of their time wasted with some sensitivity training.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: face23785

Dropping something bigger than a ball on Times Square. I work in NYC. I am insulted by this tweet. If they are so proud of it why did they take it down. Sorry, but you can't use your Jedi mind tricks to erase something you don't want to own. People in the military think they are better than everyone else who votes and pays taxes. This is what I meant by "power corrupts".



No one suggested this. You have the emotional maturity of a potato to take such offense to a sentence that does not say what you think it does.




People in the military think they are better than everyone else who votes and pays taxes.


No, we don't or didn't. We do have a better perspective on the purpose and scope of the military. Most civilians like yourself have a Hollywood idea of what the military is and you regularly stereotype the military. You also don't seem to understand what our military is for.




This is what I meant by "power corrupts".


A tweet?



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

As usual, more measured than my responses. I get so aggravated with these anti-military types that I tend to lose my cool a bit in my responses.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

It was taken down for the reason I stated in my OP. PC culture has crept into the military, particularly in the Air Force. I saw this first hand while I was serving. They won't say that's why they took it down but I've seen that kind of thing happen enough to know it when I see it.


sorry my friend
not just going to trust you


it seems to be an easy out for the assholes when they get stupid which i a lot and say some # that they probably shouldnt.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord



The thing is stealth bomber pilots have never tweeted about dropping nukes to the world on new years day and it is unpresedented. No one with common sense would do something like that.


I don't think anyone with common sense saw a nuclear bomb drop in the footage or in the language used. I don't think that common sense is lacking on the military side, it's ignorant that anyone not in today's military could possibly demand disciplinary action for the service man or women that posted it. It was taken down. Beating a dead horse?

I've learned to cool my jets over the past few years, but I sure do have to work at it when I am in contact with someone who spits uneducated, inexperienced demands at those with the education and the experience. The worst kind of arrogance.
edit on 1-1-2019 by Witness2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: face23785

It was taken down for the reason I stated in my OP. PC culture has crept into the military, particularly in the Air Force. I saw this first hand while I was serving. They won't say that's why they took it down but I've seen that kind of thing happen enough to know it when I see it.


sorry my friend
not just going to trust you


it seems to be an easy out for the assholes when they get stupid which i a lot and say some # that they probably shouldnt.





You don't have to believe me. We will continue to make sure you have the freedom to believe whatever incorrect theories you want.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

I'm used to soft people freaking out over nothing.

I was a Blackhawk crew chief. Can you imagine the looks and comments from the ill-informed whenever we showed up to a small airstrip or something during a training flight? Even a larger airport you got the looks and comments. Like an aircrew was gonna occupy the airport and kill the women and children.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Witness2008

It comes from a secret disdain many of them have for the military. They miss the old days of the 60s and 70s when it was cool to treat vets like #. They think we're all dumb, uneducated hicks that waste all of the US's money (hint: the majority of US federal spending is on domestic programs).



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: face23785

I'm used to soft people freaking out over nothing.

I was a Blackhawk crew chief. Can you imagine the looks and comments from the ill-informed whenever we showed up to a small airstrip or something during a training flight? Even a larger airport you got the looks and comments. Like an aircrew was gonna occupy the airport and kill the women and children.



Oh I sure can imagine, I heard the stories from you guys when I'd be fueling your helos



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
We will continue to make sure you have the freedom to believe whatever incorrect theories you want.


right on

keep up the good work



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

I grew up in the 60's and 70's, and my respect for the military was born out of seeing guys come home, listening to their experiences and seeing the way they were treated. And the one thing that burns me about the treatment of Vietnam Vets is the fact that this country still had the draft in place. I suppose uneducated butt hurt is timeless.

My respect has only grown over the years.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Witness2008
a reply to: face23785

I grew up in the 60's and 70's, and my respect for the military was born out of seeing guys come home, listening to their experiences and seeing the way they were treated. And the one thing that burns me about the treatment of Vietnam Vets is the fact that this country still had the draft in place. I suppose uneducated butt hurt is timeless.

My respect has only grown over the years.



Thanks for that. I wish some of the folks on this forum had that kind of respect. When things like this happen, you can see that deep-seeded hatred boil up to the surface.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: face23785

"I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

United States Armed Forces oath of enlistment


To sum up, they defend a piece of paper (which they consider an ally) and will do what they are told.

It occurs to me that the US has three foundational documents. Apparently the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights aren't important to the Armed Forces.

Oh, and the citizens of the United States clearly aren't actually to be defended, because they might turn out to be considered a 'domestic enemy' of the piece of paper.



Fyi, the Bill of Rights is the first 10 Amendments of the Constitution. And the Declaration of Independence isn't a legal document. You might want to bone up on these things before you comment.


Firstly, the Declaration does have implications on the interpretation of law because all those "self evident" truths form a rationale behind the aspirations that “all men are created equal” with “unalienable rights” that include “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” One might argue that it is foundational to the Constitution, which in turn is foundational to the Bill of Rights.

As such, all three documents represent a continuum of the legal basis of the nation.

One might also argue that the term "legal document" is a rather amorphous thing. For instance, a living will, despite possibly being drawn up by a lawyer, is not a legal document with 100% guarantees. But anything drawn up by a lawyer is a legal document - so, what IS a legal document?

edit on 1/1/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

I get a chill up my back then feel all warm and fuzzy inside when I see Military jets overhead. I think that I watched the Stratcom tweet about ten times.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Breakthestreak

originally posted by: KKLOCO

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: KKLOCO

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: KKLOCO
a reply to: face23785

So to sum up your OP: screw anyone who who finds it appalling that the USSC would tweet them dropping massive bombs — and gloating about it.

Bombs = death. Most the time, innocent death is involved.

Why tweet this during the ball dropping event? What was the purpose?

Should we all pull ours out too, like the USSC did? We can all compare who’s is bigger.



Your summary is completely off. You should try re-reading too, you completely missed the point of what the bombs are for, and it's not death. As for the timing, dropping a ball/dropping bombs, a New Year's themed message, would be kinda weird to tweet this on another day.


LOL, so what are bombs dropped for, if not death? I’d find it hard to believe a 30,000 pound bomb wouldn’t cause the death of life.

Just because you see some similarity of a ball dropping and bombs dropping — doesn’t mean the average person does.

It was a stupid tweet. Hence, them deleting it.


No, it was deleted due to the avalanche of hate thrown their way. Dropping bombs and dropping balls both have the word dropping but you're saying a normal person doesnt see any similarities... Now you're just denying reality in order to maintain your PC view of the world.


Dropping bombs is a hateful act, is it not? So it was obviously the USSC that incited the hate. They just didn’t like it being directed at them.

Typical American: it’s okay for America to drop bombs — but it’s not okay for bombs to be dropped on America.

All hail MERIKA’


Ha ha haaaaa, dropping bombs is ‘hateful’???!?!!?

What??????

Man I’m glad you weren’t around when they were dropping bombs on Hitler, those hateful bigots.

‘Hateful’

What the hell? NOBODY believes that the Air Force drops bombs because of ‘hate’.

NOBODY


It seems to me to be the opposite of loving.

They weren't dropping bombs on Hitler because they loved him. They wanted to kill him. It's the diametric opposite of a loving act.

I'm pretty sure that dropping bombs is hateful. Those bombs were designed, and expected to, kill people. Hateful.

edit on 1/1/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 02:30 PM
link   
i have to ask - does ANYONE in america comprehend the concept of :

gallows humour ?????????????????



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: face23785

"I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

United States Armed Forces oath of enlistment


To sum up, they defend a piece of paper (which they consider an ally) and will do what they are told.

It occurs to me that the US has three foundational documents. Apparently the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights aren't important to the Armed Forces.

Oh, and the citizens of the United States clearly aren't actually to be defended, because they might turn out to be considered a 'domestic enemy' of the piece of paper.



Fyi, the Bill of Rights is the first 10 Amendments of the Constitution. And the Declaration of Independence isn't a legal document. You might want to bone up on these things before you comment.


Firstly, the Declaration does have implications on the interpretation of law because all those "self evident" truths form a rationale behind the aspirations that “all men are created equal” with “unalienable rights” that include “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” One might argue that it is foundational to the Constitution, which in turn is foundational to the Bill of Rights.

As such, all three documents represent a continuum of the legal basis of the nation.

One might also argue that the term "legal document" is a rather amorphous thing. For instance, a living will, despite possibly being drawn up by a lawyer, is not a legal document with 100% guarantees. But anything drawn up by a lawyer is a legal document - so, what IS a legal document?


The Declaration is essentially a background document. Sure you can find some "scholars" somewhere that consider it a true legal document, but there's no legally binding language in it. The Constitution, on the other hand, is the actual foundation of all of our laws. In theory, if a law doesn't comply with the Constitution, the law is invalid. There's a pretty clear difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution in that regard.

None of this addresses the boneheaded comment about the military "not caring about the Bill of Rights" when the Bill of Rights is IN the Constitution. Try to contain that hate buddy, it leads to silly errors of logic like that.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

US Strategic Commands needs to remember that you drop the bomb first, then apologize - not the other way round.

All this apologizing makes me think of giant meteor and whether its running in 2020.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 03:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Witness2008

It comes from a secret disdain many of them have for the military. They miss the old days of the 60s and 70s when it was cool to treat vets like #. They think we're all dumb, uneducated hicks that waste all of the US's money (hint: the majority of US federal spending is on domestic programs).


Firstly, disdain for the organized and armed goes back into pre-history. When people are scraping to survive, farming and trading and such, the military represent a strain on resources and people who otherwise might have an easier time, get unavoidably pressed into service, depriving them and their families.

Sometimes the outcome of battles have been positive for the community but because you can't un-kill the dead, battles can be lost and the reasons for the battles, in the first place, are usually independent of the lives of the general public, the vast majority of military actions are the enemies of prosperity and peace.

Secondly, it is entirely rational and necessary that US Federal spending be on itself. What many disagree with is the proportion of Federal spending that goes to the military. The US spends more money both per capita and in total, than any other nation on Earth, including ones who are actively at war. Since the US has no real current military threats, wouldn't it be good stewardship to reign in spending in as many areas as possible, especially in areas that do not have an impact on actual security (Things like large scale live munition training exercises).

Consider other threat response services like the fire brigades or police. Do they have large scale and expensive multi-state training exercises, or do they trust the individual training and equipment and just get on with the job?

edit on 1/1/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
21
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join